Levine Andrew J, Hinkin Charles H, Marion Sarah, Keuning Allison, Castellon Steven A, Lam Mona M, Robinet Marta, Longshore Douglas, Newton Thomas, Myers Hector, Durvasula Ramani S
Neuropsychiatric Institute, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Health Psychol. 2006 May;25(3):329-35. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.25.3.329.
Controversy remains regarding the reliability of methods used to determine adherence to antiretroviral medication in HIV. In this study the authors compared adherence rates of 119 HIV-positive participants during a 6-month study, as estimated via electronic monitoring (EM) and self-report (SR). Adherence for both short (4-day) and long (4-week, or intervisit) periods was examined, as well as factors that underlie discrepancies between EM and SR. Results showed that intervisit EM estimates were consistently lower than those of SR. SR estimates based on shorter periods (4 days) were closer to those of EM. Higher discrepancies between EM and SR estimates were associated with lower cognitive functioning and externalized locus of control. These findings lend support for using both EM and SR methods; however, study design (e.g., length) and other factors (e.g., cognitive status, cost) should be considered.
关于用于确定艾滋病病毒感染者抗逆转录病毒药物依从性的方法的可靠性，仍存在争议。在本研究中，作者比较了119名艾滋病毒阳性参与者在为期6个月的研究期间通过电子监测（EM）和自我报告（SR）估计的依从率。研究了短期（4天）和长期（4周或访视间期）的依从性，以及导致EM和SR之间差异的因素。结果显示，访视间期的EM估计值始终低于SR估计值。基于较短时间段（4天）的SR估计值更接近EM估计值。EM和SR估计值之间的较大差异与较低的认知功能和外部控制点有关。这些发现支持同时使用EM和SR方法；然而，应考虑研究设计（如时长）和其他因素（如认知状态、成本）。
